Bennettbarnet
Well-Known Member
The part where you claimed that I said they couldn't be challenged.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
The part where you claimed that I said they couldn't be challenged.Haha. You said that being offended on behalf of someone else is virtue signalling. Applied to a real world scenario it clearly isn’t, at least not always.
No agenda here my friend.
What part of it is weird?No. Though you have given a bit of a weird take.
So you’re saying we need to step it up, maybe make it more visible?
So you’re saying we need to step it up, maybe make it more visible?
The part where you claimed that I said they couldn't be challenged.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
You’re so close.More players feeling brave enough to come out as gay would work wonders for the campaign and show it is working, yes.
At the moment it is just a gimmick they pull for a couple of weeks every season and then forget about. Pointless.
What are you insinuating?You’re so close.
Not an unreasonable point. I guess it's also about crowd attitudes too mind you, and allowing fans to be themselves without discomfort or fear.The campaign has been going on for what, maybe a decade now, and in that time 1 professional player in a dead Australian league has come out as gay.
Yeah the campaign is working wonders.
The poster clearly has some kind of agenda having made a handle of posts in over a year and then suddenly chirps up on this.Challenging it means I have taken offence. But according to you I can’t take offence on another’s behalf.
He has a prejudice.OK so he has a prejudice. What now?
Are you telling me that you don't have offensive predjudices? And think about it before you answer.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
You can have an opinion opposed the original poster. My opinion is also the polar opposite. It is how it is challenged that I have an objection with. It is my opinion that they should be called out for being incorrect with evidence and we'll thought out debate, not just a blanket "that's so offensive" as many have done.Everyone is allowed their opinion mate but that only extends to one level. An opinion disagreeing with the first opinion is virtue signalling.
Same with “free speech”. People must have the right to free speech but don’t go disagreeing with them as that is subduing the first person free speech and essentially “cancelling” them.
Got it?
No, challenging it could just mean that his ideas do not align with your own. Or that you believe it to be inappropriate and therefor the right thing to do.Challenging it means I have taken offence. But according to you I can’t take offence on another’s behalf.
In your instance, I can understand that offence will be caused as it is personal to you.
For everyone else, his opinion should be treated with the contempt it deserves and either engage to educate him or move on.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Unless they go to wasps gamesCoventry City F.C is for EVERYONE
No, challenging it could just mean that his ideas do not align with your own. Or that you believe it to be inappropriate and therefor the right thing to do.
This all started because of my objection to people not articulating their objections in the right way. Its counter productive to use blanket terms of "im offended" and in some cultures and communities, the faux outrage on their behalf would be considered offensive in itself. Think how to better project your feelings and then at the end of it, come to the realisation that a bigoted opinion doesn't matter and that if it can't be educated in a different direction, ignore it and carry on with your life.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Just to be clear. I am saying that children brought up within a STABLE, LOVING and CARING mother and father environment is the best for that child. Any other arrangement will always be second best to that but that does not mean a child cannot be bought up well by single parents, adopted parents, grandparents or even a village community. It seems some posters are just determined to look for the negative. Again, many on this thread talk inclusion and diversity for all but only on their terms. If my opinion challenges that then it has to be accepted as an alternative view. You do not have to agree.
Yeah all this and the American virtue signalling nonsense is just an attempt to demean and stop the majority from challenging them.Ironic isn't it, that the views of the OP and his 'silent majority' (his words) have attracted so little support on SBT ?
Anyone would think that the term 'silent majority' had been purposely incorrectly used, to falsely bolster and exaggerate his poorly supported and factually inaccurate views.
'non-existent & fantasy majority' would have been more accurate.
Just to be clear. I am saying that children brought up within a STABLE, LOVING and CARING mother and father environment is the best for that child. Any other arrangement will always be second best to that but that does not mean a child cannot be bought up well by single parents, adopted parents, grandparents or even a village community. It seems some posters are just determined to look for the negative. Again, many on this thread talk inclusion and diversity for all but only on their terms. If my opinion challenges that then it has to be accepted as an alternative view. You do not have to agree.
Yes, that's how debates work...you find a flaw (or two) in someone's arguments and give an alternative view.It seems some posters are just determined to look for the negative.
For the love of God, please stop. Were you born in the 1800’s? What is your opinion on same sex marriage? When gay people such as Rylan from X Factor are on your TV do you change the channel? Are you homophobic because you are uncomfortable with your own sexuality?Not sure why you are asking me this. The notion of a traditional nuclear family is not my dictate. I’m merely considering and comparing several millennia of what was considered the traditional family unit which I agree with as opposed to the last 1 or 2 decades of 21st century thinking.
Nor am I diminishing you or your husband’s capabilities of providing solid care and love to your daughter who you rescued from what sounds like a dreadful situation. As much as you could be the best fathers any child could ever have, you will never be the best mothers.
The first understanding any child gets about gender qualities is usually from a loving mother and father. If one of those is missing, there is an automatic relational imbalance that child will have to navigate at some point. Each gender brings something different to the party to encourage a rounded development of son or daughter. I am sure you and your husband have discussed this but when your daughter reaches puberty and adolescence a daughter will generally benefit most from her mother’s guidance. Since neither of you have those qualities, she will have to glean that from an alternative mother figure and if she is unable to do that where will that leave her emotionally?
You say my views are among the minority on this thread, perhaps they are but this forum is not a barometer for society as I believe there is still a silent and vocal majority. I notice that several regular posters have vented their frustrations with my stance with colourful language and name calling. I am not looking for anyone’s approval and truly do not care for it. Nor am I looking to wind people up as I see no benefit in that. I started this thread to see if my stance regarding CCFC supporting Rainbow Laces was valid or not. I understand why the campaign exists but still uneasy with the deeper ramifications it poses in my opinion which I will not go into on this thread.
As for your genuine question, I do not possess a crystal ball so cannot tell you that one way or another, only time will tell. But if you are really asking for my opinion, since society is basically people which includes children then I would say that any child brought up in a single sex environment will not be better off no matter how loving the parents are.
I would say most replies have been positive, anyway. Positively supporting inclusion, and equality, and a lack of discrimination. That's kind of positive, to me...Yes, that's how debates work...you find a flaw (or two) in someone's arguments and give an alternative view.
Your opening post was almost entirely 'negative', so guess what...you got alot of replies...just not the kind you wanted.
Seriously, where do cunts like you socialise, 1957?No, I am not. If a Flat Earth believer was on here you wouldn't be offended by them. Its that his opinion is politically sensitive and therefor you are offended and have a need to tell everyone just how offended you are. Its the very definition of virtue signalling.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
So just because the issue doesn’t directly effect me I can’t be offended by it? Who are you to determine the criteria of what people can or can’t find offensive?In your instance, I can understand that offence will be caused as it is personal to you.
For everyone else, his opinion should be treated with the contempt it deserves and either engage to educate him or move on.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
I do because he's annoyingFor the love of God, please stop. Were you born in the 1800’s? What is your opinion on same sex marriage? When gay people such as Rylan from X Factor are on your TV do you change the channel? Are you homophobic because you are uncomfortable with your own sexuality?
On that basis though? How can you say that man and woman is going to be better for the kid just based on that?Just to be clear. I am saying that children brought up within a STABLE, LOVING and CARING mother and father environment is the best for that child. Any other arrangement will always be second best to that but that does not mean a child cannot be bought up well by single parents, adopted parents, grandparents or even a village community. It seems some posters are just determined to look for the negative. Again, many on this thread talk inclusion and diversity for all but only on their terms. If my opinion challenges that then it has to be accepted as an alternative view. You do not have to agree.
I’m sure he’ll take it on board that he’s completely misunderstood the entire gay community by thinking it’s a lifestyle choice. Apologise and that will be the end of it. And also he’ll request the thread is deleted as it makes us all look like twats.
Do you find it impossible to engage with anyone with whom you disagree without blowing a fuse ?For the love of God, please stop. Were you born in the 1800’s? What is your opinion on same sex marriage? When gay people such as Rylan from X Factor are on your TV do you change the channel? Are you homophobic because you are uncomfortable with your own sexuality?
More articulate conversation from our resident Mr Angry. Seriously, you need to get a hobby.Seriously, where do cunts like you socialise, 1957?
More articulate conversation from our resident Mr Angry. Seriously, you need to get a hobby.
For the love of God, please stop. Were you born in the 1800’s? What is your opinion on same sex marriage? When gay people such as Rylan from X Factor are on your TV do you change the channel? Are you homophobic because you are uncomfortable with your own sexuality?
But I assume that’s because he’s fairly talentless and not to do with his sexualityI do change the channel when Rylan is on to be fair
I do change the channel when Rylan is on to be fair
Idiots like you make me angry. It’s not as if you’re thick as fuck either, which is even more annoying as you truly believe the uneducated shite you sayMore articulate conversation from our resident Mr Angry. Seriously, you need to get a hobby.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?